| 1. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Are people inequality averse or just risk averse?
- 2001
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Individuals' preferences for risk and inequality are measured through experimental choices between hypothetical societies and lotteries. The median relative risk aversion, which is often seen to reflect social inequality aversion, is between 2 and 3. We also estimate the individual inequality aversion, reflecting individuals' willingness to pay for living in a more equal society.Left-wing voters and women are both more risk- and inequality averse than others. The model allows for non-monotonic SWFs, implying that welfare may decrease with an individual's income at high income levels. This is illustrated in simulations based on the empirical results.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Do administrators have the same priorities for risk reductions as the general public?
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0895-5646 .- 1573-0476. ; 45:1, s. 79-95
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A stated preference survey was used to investigate the potential discrepancy between the priorities of public administrators and the general public regarding risk reductions. Both groups of respondents were asked to assume the role of a public policy-maker and choose between different public safety projects. We investigate differences in three areas: (i) large vs. small accidents, (ii) actual vs. subjective risk, and (iii) the trade-off between avoiding fatalities and serious injuries for different age groups and accidents. We find only minor differences between the responses of administrators and the general public, the most important of which is the difference in priorities between reducing the risk of many small or one large accident. In this area the most common response from the general public is that they prefer avoiding many small accidents rather than one large accident while among the administrators there is almost an equal split between the two options.
|
|
| 5. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Do you do what you say or do you do what you say others do?
- 2008
-
Rapport (refereegranskat)abstract
- We design a donations vs. own money choice experiment comparing three differenttreatments. In two of the treatments the pay-offs are hypothetical. In the first of these, a shortcheap talk script was used, and subjects were required to state their own preferences in thisscenario. In the second, subjects were asked to state how they believed an average studentwould respond to the choices. In the third treatment the pay-offs were real, allowing us to usethe results to compare the validity of the two hypothetical treatments. We find a stronghypothetical bias in both hypothetical treatments where the marginal willingness to pay fordonations are higher when subjects state their own preferences but lower when subjects statewhat they believe are other students preferences. The explanation is probably a self-imageeffect in both cases. We find that it is mainly women who are prone to hypothetical bias inthis study
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Carlsson, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Value of statistical life and cause of accident: A choice experiment
- 2008
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The results from this study are used to compare the marginal willingness to pay for risk reductions and calculate corresponding values of statistical life for road, fire and drowning accidents in Sweden. The values were estimated using a mail survey with 5200 respondents where each respondent was required to answer nine different dichotomous willingness to pay questions which were varied according to accident type, base line risk, risk reduction and cost. The risk reductions were expressed as mortality risk for adult Swedes. The questionnaire also contained socioeconomic and risk related questions. We find that - Women are more likely to take actions in order to reduce their mortality risk. - Older respondents are more likely to take actions in order to reduce their risk of dying by fire and road accidents, but not drowning. - Respondents who live in apartment blocks are less likely to take actions to reduce their mortality risk. - Respondents who have had a previous bad experience with road accidents are more likely to take mortality risk reducing actions. - Respondents who found the valuation questions easy to answer are more likely to take actions. Using results from at probit regression model we find the value of statistical life for road accidents to be 20.2 million Swedish kronor (⬠2.2 million), 13.3 million kronor (⬠1.4 million) for fire accidents, and 12.4 million kronor (⬠1.3 million) for drowning accidents. Our results therefore suggest that different values should be used in a cost-benefit framework depending on the accident type. The value of statistical life for road accidents is within the span of other Swedish estimates where several studies using contingent valuation methods with WTP-questions have arrived at values between 17 and 24 million Swedish kronor (Persson et al, 1996; Persson et al, 2001; Hultkrantz et al, 2006; Svensson, 2007). Further comparison is not possible because we are unaware of any other studies that estimate the value of statistical life using WTP-questions for fire and drowning accidents. The respondents were also asked whether they believed they could affect the level of risk and also questioned on the extent of their concern regarding the different types of accidents. The responses indicate that while subjects believe that they can affect the risk levels of all three accident types, they believe that they can control the risk for road accidents to a lesser extent for road accidents than for the others. Similarly, although subjects do not worry about the mortality risks to any large extent, there is a clear difference between road accidents and the other causes. It may be the case that these two factors cause the differences in value of statistical life estimates for road accidents on one hand and fire and drowning accidents on the other hand. The results that subjective beliefs of the risk such as dread and voluntariness influences the value of statistical life is in line with suggestions by Slovic (1987), Savage (1993) and Chilton et al (2006)
|
|
| 8. |
- Carlsson, Fredrik, 1968, et al.
(författare)
-
Value of statistical life and cause of accident: A choice experiment
- 2008
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The purpose of this study is to compare value of statistical life (VSL) estimates for traffic, drowning and fire accidents. Using a choice experiment in a mail survey of 5000 Swedish respondents we estimated the willingness to pay for risk reductions in the three accidents. In the experiment respondents were asked in a series of questions, whether they would choose risk reducing investments where type of accident, cost of the investment, the risk reduction acquired, and the baseline risk varied between questions. The VSLs for fire and drowning accidents were found to be about 1/3 lower than that for traffic accidents. Although respondents worry more about traffic accidents, this alone cannot explain the difference in VSL estimates. The difference between fire and drowning accidents was not found to be statistically significant.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
- Daruvala, Dinky, 1962
(författare)
-
Experimental Studies on Risk, Inequality and Relative Standing
- 2006
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This thesis consists of four separate experimental studies that concern individuals' preferences and choices on issues of risk, inequality and relative standing. In the first paper, individuals' aversion to risk and inequality, and their concern for relative standing, are measured through experimental choices between hypothetical societies. It is found that, on average, that individuals are both fairly inequality-averse and have a strong concern for relative income. The results are used to illustrate welfare consequences based on a utilitarian SWF and a modified CRRA utility function. It is shown that the social marginal utility of income may then become negative, even at income levels that are far from extreme. The second paper measures individuals' preferences for risk and inequality using choices between imagined societies and lotteries. Most of the respondents in the study are found to be individually inequality averse, reflecting a willingness to pay for living in a more equal society. Left-wing voters and women are both more risk and inequality averse than others. The model allows for non-monotonic SWFs, implying that welfare may decrease with an individual's income at high income levels, which is illustrated in simulations based on the empirical results. The third paper tests the relative performance of some of the competing social preference models have been developed inspired by the evidence from economic experiments. This is done using an experimental design that is aimed at capturing pure distributional concerns in a multi-person setting. We find that the individuals in this study are heterogeneous and that they do not follow any single notion of fairness or inequality aversion. In addition, the results suggest that efficiency concerns are not confined to students of economics but are important to students of all disciplines. The fourth paper reports results from an economic experiment where respondents are asked to make choices between risky outcomes for themselves and others. In addition, we elicit information about the respondents' perception of others risk preferences. We investigate whether subjects' own risk preferences and gender stereotypes are reflected in the prediction they make for the risk preferences of others and the way this occurs. We find no significant difference in risk preferences between men and women in the experiment. However, both men and women perceive women to be more risk averse than men. When predicting other people's risk preferences, the respondents tend to use a combination of their own risk preferences and stereotypes. Moreover, when making risky choices for others, the respondents generally use a combination of their own risk preferences and their average predicted risk preference of the targeted group.
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
- Daruvala, Dinky, 1962
(författare)
-
Gender, Risk and Stereotypes
- 2006
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This paper reports results from an economic experiment where respondents are asked to make choices between risky outcomes for themselves and others. In addition, we elicit information about the "respondents" perception of others risk preferences. We investigate whether "subjects" own risk preferences and gender stereotypes are reflected in the prediction they make for the risk preferences of others and the way this occurs. We find no significant difference in risk preferences between men and women in the experiment. However, both men and women perceive women to be more risk averse than men. When predicting other people´s risk preferences, the respondents tend to use a combination of their own risk preferences and stereotypes. Moreover, when making risky choices for others, the respondents generally use a combination of their own risk preferences and their average predicted risk preference of the targeted group.
|
|
| 14. |
- Daruvala, Dinky
(författare)
-
Gender, Risk and Stereotypes
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 2007.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 15. |
- Daruvala, Dinky, 1962, et al.
(författare)
-
Measuring hypothetical grandparents preferences for quality and relative standings
- 2001
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Individuals' aversion to risk and inequality, and their concern for relative standing, are measured through experimental choices between hypothetical societies. It is found that on average individuals are both fairly inequality-averse and have a strong concern for relative income. The results are used to illustrate welfare consequences based on a utilitarian SWF and a modified CRRA utility function. It is shown that the social marginal utility of income may then become negative, even at income levels that are far from extreme.
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
- Daruvala, Dinky, 1962
(författare)
-
Would The Right Social Preference Model Please Stand Up!
- 2006
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- A number of competing social preference models have been developed inspired by the evidence from economic experiments. We test the relative performance of some of these models using an experimental design that is aimed at capturing pure distributional concerns in a multi-person setting. We find that the individuals in this study are heterogeneous and that they do not follow any single notion of fairness or inequality aversion. In addition, the results suggest that efficiency concerns are not confined to students of economics but are important to students of all disciplines.
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
- Jaldell, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Do public administrators have the same preferences for risk reductions as citizens?
- 2010
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this paper we compare the preferences of the general public with the preferences of public administrators working in the area of safety. We are interested in three different aspects of risk reductions: (i) large versus small accidents, (ii) actual versus subjective risks, and (iii) trade-off between avoiding fatalities and injuries for different age groups. We use stated preference surveys where respondents assume the role of a policy maker. In particular, respondents were asked to choose between different public infrastructure projects that resulted in different outcomes. When responding they were asked to take the role of a public policy-maker. For the general public, we use survey responses from two mail questionnaires sent out between May and June 2007 to a random sample of 1400 and 2600 Swedish citizens. For the administrators, we used survey responses from an internet survey sent out in September 2008 to a random sample of 330 administrators. The administrators were working in the field of fire and rescue services both in the national and local level.Large and small accidentsThe question concerned the choice between avoiding one large accident with many deaths, or many smaller accidents with fewer dead people per accident. Both projects would in total save an equal number of lives. A large fraction of the citizens are indifferent to both projects, but the most common response is that many small accidents should be avoided instead of one large accident. Among the administrators, there is almost an equal split between preferring to avoid many small and one large accident, and fewer think that the two projects are equally good. Thus, administrators are more likely to choose the project that will avoid one large accident, and they are less likely to say that the two projects are equally good. Actual versus perceived risksRespondents were asked to choose between projects with different effects on the actual and perceived risks. In one case, peoples perception of the risk is correct. In the other case people overestimate the risk. A majority of both citizens and administrators chose the alternative where the actual and subjective risk decreases in equal ratio, but a higher percentage of administrators (over 30 %) opt for the alternative where the decrease in subjective risk is higher.Saving different groups We find that saving the life of 1.43 10-year olds is equivalent to saving one 40-year-old from dying in accidents. Likewise, saving the life of one 70-year-old is equivalent to saving 3.31 10-year olds from dying. The social marginal substitution rate between saving a life and avoiding a serious injury is between 3.2 and 3.8 for the different age groups, thus one saved life is equivalent to avoiding around 3.5 seriously injured, which is significantly lower than the officially used value of 6 by the Swedish Road Administration. We find only a few differences between citizens and administrators preferences with respect to different age groups.
|
|
| 20. |
- Jaldell, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Do you do what you say or do you do what you say others do?
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Journal of Choice Modelling. - 1755-5345. ; 3:2, s. 113-133
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We design a donations vs. own money choice experiment and compare the results from three different treatments. In two of the treatments the pay-offs are hypothetical. In the first of these, a short cheap talk script was used and subjects were required to state their own preferences in this scenario. In the second treatment, subjects were asked to state how they believed the average student would respond to the choices. In the third treatment the pay-offs were real, allowing us to use the results to compare the validity of the two hypothetical treatments. Our hypothesis is that when subjects are asked to state how they believe an average person would respond, they will use their own preferences in their responses without using the survey situation for self-enhancement. However, we find a strong hypothetical bias in both hypothetical treatments where the marginal willingness to pay for donations is higher when subjects state their own preferences but lower when subjects state what they believe are other peoples preferences. Our explanation is that subjects use the survey situation to bolster their self-image. We also find that it is mainly women who are prone to hypothetical bias in this study
|
|
| 21. |
- Jaldell, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Preferences for lives, injuries, and age: A stated preference survey
- 2009
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- One of the more difficult ethical questions from a public decision making perspective is whether the estimation of benefits from risk reducing projects should be influenced by factors such as age groups and risk domains. For example, should a project that saves the lives of elderly people be assigned a different benefit value in cost-benefit analyses than one that saves the same number of childrens lives? This paper examines the preferences of the general public in Sweden on these issues. We design a choice experiment in which subjects are required to make six pair-wise choices where the characteristics of each choice are accident type (fire and traffic), number of fatalities and serious injuries avoided, and age of those saved (5-15-, 35-45- and 65-75-year-olds). We find that avoiding the fatality of one 5-15-year-old is equivalent to avoiding 1.4 fatalities of 35-45-year-olds. Likewise, avoiding the fatality of one 5-15-year-old is equivalent to avoiding 3.3 fatalities of 65-75-year-olds. We find no significant differences between the causes of accident. One avoided fatality is found to be equivalent to around 3.5 avoided severe injuries, which is lower than the official value of 6 used by the Swedish Road Administration
|
|
| 22. |
- Jaldell, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Preferences for lives, injuries, and age: A stated preference survey
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Accident Analysis and Prevention. - 0001-4575 .- 1879-2057. ; 42:6, s. 1814-1821
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- One of the more difficult ethical questions from a public decision-making perspective is whether the estimation of benefits from risk reducing projects should be influenced by factors such as age groups and risk domains. For example, should a project that saves the lives of elderly people be assigned a more different benefit value in cost-benefit analyses than one that saves the same number of children's lives? This paper examines the preferences of the general public in Sweden on these issues. We design a choice experiment in which subjects are required to make six pair-wise choices where the characteristics of each choice are accident type (fire and traffic), number of fatalities and serious injuries avoided, and age of those saved (515-, 3545- and 6575-year-olds). We find that avoiding the fatality of one 515-year-old is equivalent to avoiding 1.4 fatalities of 3545-year-olds. Likewise, avoiding the fatality of one 515-year-old is equivalent to avoiding 3.3 fatalities of 6575-year-olds. We find no significant differences between the causes of accident. One avoided fatality is found to be equivalent to around 3.5 avoided severe injuries, which is lower than the official value of 6 used by the Swedish Road Administration
|
|
| 23. |
- Jaldell, Henrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Value of Statistical Life and Cause of Accident: A Choice Experiment
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Risk Analysis. - 0272-4332 .- 1539-6924. ; 30:6, s. 975-986
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The purpose of this study is to compare the value of statistical life (VSL) estimates for traffic, drowning, and fire accidents. Using a choice experiment in a mail survey of 5,000 Swedish respondents we estimated the willingness to pay for risk reductions in the three accidents. In the experiment respondents were asked a series of questions, whether they would choose risk reducing investments where type of accident, cost of the investment, the risk reduction acquired, and the baseline risk varied between questions. The VSLs for fire and drowning accidents were found to be about 1/3 lower than that for traffic accidents. Although respondents worry more about traffic accidents, this alone cannot explain the difference in VSL estimates. The difference between fire and drowning accidents was not found to be statistically significant
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
